Persuasion Ethics

57th Annual Conference of the

International Communication Association
San Francisco, CA, May 24-28, 2007
Pulic relations mo!els
an! "ersuasion ethics#
is fear of "ersuasion an ostacle to ethics$
Johanna Fawkes
PhD student (from 01/07/07)
Leeds Metropolitan Uniersit!
"eadin#le! $ampus
Leeds L%& '(%
U)
*mail+ ,ofawkespr-aol./om
1
Persuasion Ethics
Pulic relations mo!els an! "ersuasion ethics# is fear of
"ersuasion an ostacle to ethics$
Abstract
0he paper proposes that there are three main o1sta/les to /onstru/tin# a
/oherent ethi/al framework for pu1li/ relations
1) the mar#inali2ation of persuasion in the dominant approa/hes to
pu1li/ relations theor!3
4) the ar!in# attitudes to persuasion in /ompetin# models of pu1li/
relations
') the ar!in# ethi/al assumptions in ea/h model.
0his paper /ompares approa/hes to propa#anda and persuasion from
pu1li/ relations s/holars and from other dis/iplines and su##ests that definitions
do not help distin#uish these aspe/ts of /ommuni/ation. 5t then /ompares the
attitudes to persuasion and to persuasion ethi/s taken 1! the main models of
pu1li/ relations+ 1oundar! spanner6 ado/ate6 relationship mana#er6 and 7 from
the /riti/s 7 propa#andist. Finall! it offers a model from so/ial ps!/holo#! that
/ould 1e adapted to 8map9 the intera/tion of or#ani2ational /ommuni/ation with its
man! pu1li/s from an ethi/al perspe/tie.
Key words: propa#anda6 persuasion6 ethi/s6 pu1li/ relations6 1oundar!
spanner6 ado/ate6 relationship mana#er6 so/ial ps!/holo#!
4
Persuasion Ethics
Introduction
0here is a ra#in# de1ate on the role of pu1li/ relations in so/iet!6 onl!
partiall! refle/ted in pu1li/ relations own literature6 whi/h has tended to i#nore or
dismiss the atta/ks on its pra/ti/es.
:n one side of the de1ate are the /riti/s of pu1li/ relations (D.Miller6
%tau1er and ;ampton6 $homsk!6 *wen6 amon# others) who stress pu1li/
relations9 roots in propa#anda6 parti/ularl! durin# the first half of the 40
th
$entur!.
$urtis (4004)6 for e<ample6 hi#hli#hts the role of *dward =erna!s6 %i#mund
Freud9s nephew6 whose first 1ook was /alled Propaganda (1>4?) and who is
often termed the 8father of pu1li/ relations9 in shapin# the last /entur!9s /ulture of
persuasion. 0he! #o on to assert that the same te/hni@ues (see Delwi/he6 4004)
are 1ein# used to promote /orporate and /ultural alues6 as well as #oods and
politi/al parties. =e/ause of the une@ual distri1ution of pu1li/ relations resour/es
in so/iet! and the undue power e<erted 1! /orporate interests6 the! ar#ue that
pu1li/ relations undermines demo/ra/! and stifles or distorts de1ates.
:n the other side of the de1ate pu1li/ relations9 defenders (Aruni#6
Do2ier6 $utlip6 Are#or!6 Ber/i/ and others) tend to minimise pu1li/ relations
histori/al roots in propa#anda. 0he *</ellen/e pro,e/t has the lauda1le aim of
improin# pu1li/ relations pra/ti/e 1! emphasisin# the 1est and demonstratin#
how others /an improe. "oweer6 there has 1een tenden/! to mar#inalise the
role of persuasion (Molone!6 4000)6 /on/entratin# instead on the positie role
that pu1li/ relations makes to so/iet! and demo/ra/!. 0here has 1een a re/ent
reision (Aruni#6 4001) of this approa/h whi/h is dis/ussed in more detail 1elow.
=etween the two are a small 1od! of interested a/ademi/s (L9*tan#6
Pie/2ka 6 Molone!6 Ceaer6 "olt2hausen and M/)ie amon# others) who take a
/riti/al perspe/tie on the /laims made 1! pu1li/ relations /ore te<ts 1ut do not
dismiss the field as utterl! as the first /amp tend to. 0he! note the e<tensie
inolement of pu1li/ relations9 pioneers in wartime #oernment propa#anda
(1efore the term 1e/ame pe,oratie) 1ut (L9*tan# espe/iall!) emphasise
'
Persuasion Ethics
differen/es 1etween the #rowth of the field in the U% (when/e most of the /ore
te<ts hae /ome) and in *urope and the U).
Research approach
0he paper draws on a wide ran#e of literature from the fields of
propa#anda6 the ps!/holo#! of persuasion and pu1li/ relations literature as well
as ethi/s. 0he paper takes a /riti/al perspe/tie ("all 1>?0) on pu1li/ relations9
attempts to distan/e itself from propa#anda. Ds "eath (1>>4) sa!s6 8the purpose
of the /riti/al perspe/tie is to 1e /onfrontational. (pE')9 "eath also refers to
=urke9s (1>&&) dis/ussion of this and the use of terministi/ s/reens6 where
lan#ua#e is used to shape per/eption6 ealuation and 1ehaiour6 with the
dominant for/es in an or#anisation (or in this /ase6 field of stud!) attemptin# to
determine the perspe/ties of others. $omparatie definitions are used to
dismantle the terministi/ s/reens and alue ,ud#ements often asso/iated with
words like propa#anda6 persuasion and demo/ra/!. ;ole models are e<amined
for their underl!in# assumptions6 in parti/ular in re#ard to ethi/al 1ehaiour.
0he paper attempts to /ompare attitudes to persuasion and ethi/s6 not to
esta1lish new definitions or anal!se these topi/s in depth. 0he paper draws on
work 1! Molone! (4000)6 L9*tan# and Pie/2ka (1>>&6 400&)6 L9*tan# (1>>?) and
Ceaer et al (400&). 5t e<tends their ideas 1! e<aminin# the ethi/s of persuasion
adopted 1! 7 or aaila1le for adoption 1! F different models of pu1li/ relations. D
more detailed e<ploration of propa#anda and pu1li/ relations is /oered in
Fawkes (400&1) whi/h is summari2ed here.
Finall! some /on/epts from so/ial ps!/holo#! and ps!/holo#i/al
/ommuni/ation are offered for use as a framework for dis/ussin# the ethi/s of
persuasion.
.0he paper aims to make e<pli/it assumptions whi/h are usuall! impli/it
/on/ernin# the role of pu1li/ relations in so/iet!. 0his e<posure should in turn
hi#hli#ht flaws and assumptions underpinnin# ar!in# approa/hes to pu1li/
relations ethi/s. 5t does not aim to sole the pro1lems it raises6 1ut hopes6 that in
G
Persuasion Ethics
identif!in# fault lines runnin# throu#h the field6 future work in /onstru/tin# a
/oherent ethi/al framework for pu1li/ relations will 1uild on stron#er foundations.
5t sets out to+
*sta1lish the links 1etween pu1li/ relations6 persuasion and
propa#anda 1! outlinin# different theoreti/al approa/hes and
/omparin# definitions
$ompare four ke! models of pu1li/ relations to ealuate their
approa/hes to persuasion and persuasion ethi/s
$onsider whether a /ommuni/ation model /ould 1e adapted as a
framework for dis/ussin# persuasion ethi/s.
Public relations, propaganda and persuasion- defining the field
0he fields of persuasion6 propa#anda6 and pu1li/ relations hae all 1een
e<tensiel! resear/hed and studied 7 1ut usuall! without referen/e to ea/h other.
0he 1ulk of persuasion studies (=ettin#haus and $od!6 1>>G3 Perloff6
400'3 %imons6 40013 :9)eefe6 40046 for e<ample) /ome from %o/ial Ps!/holo#!
s/hools in the U%D6 whi/h hae 1een /on/erned with the process of persuasion
sin/e the 1>E0s (when the $old Car and fears of 1rainwashin# stimulated
e<tensie empiri/al resear/h). 0he! anal!se seeral de/ades of resear/h into
attitude formation and /han#e6 1elief s!stems6 /redi1ilit!6 indiidual and #roup
responses and the personalit! fa/tors whi/h influen/e the a1ilit! to persuade and
1e persuaded. 5n e<plorin# the fa/tors influen/in# the persuasion pro/ess6 su/h
as speaker @ualities6 messa#e strate#ies and audien/e fa/tors6 the! sa!
surprisin# little a1out the ethi/s of persuasion and rarel! refer to pu1li/ relations6
thou#h adertisin# and pu1li/ information /ampai#ns often proide useful /ase
studies.
Propa#anda s/holars from the so/ial ps!/holo#! perspe/tie emphasise
the links 1etween manipulation and emotional messa#es. Pratkanis and Dronson
(4001) lo/ate propa#anda in the shift of persuasie /ommuni/ation from rational
ar#ument to emotional tri##ers whi/h 8persuade not throu#h the #ieFandFtake of
E
Persuasion Ethics
ar#ument and de1ate6 1ut throu#h the manipulation of s!m1ols and of our most
1asi/ human emotions. For 1etter or worse6 ours is an a#e of propa#anda9 (p7).
:ther s/holars of persuasion and propa#anda (0a!lor6 40013 400'3 Jaksa
and Prit/hard6 1>>G amon# others) propose that the /ontent of the messa#e
should 1e separated from its intent and that propa#anda is inherentl! neutral6
1ein# simpl! a form of /ommuni/ation whi/h ma! 1e su//essful or unsu//essful
in its effe/ts. 0he! point out that mu/h of the de1ate on propa#anda and
persuasion has 1e/ome loaded with alue ,ud#ements6 so that the a/tual su1,e/t
/annot 1e seen /learl!. D#ain6 there is no dis/ussion of the role of pu1li/
relations in this field.
:n the other hand the most irulent /riti/s of pu1li/ relations (%tau1er H
;ampton6 400G3 P;Cat/h.or#3 %pinwat/h./om6 for e<ample) assert that it is
s!non!mous with propa#anda6 /itin# a /onstant stream of a1uses of pu1li/ trust
1! /orporate /ommuni/ators6 su/h as the /reation of 8front or#anisations9. 0he!
#o on to assert that hu#e resour/es6 unaaila1le to dissenters6 are 1ein# used to
promote /orporate and /ultural alues6 as well as #oods and politi/al parties.
=e/ause of the une@ual distri1ution of pu1li/ relations resour/es in so/iet! and
the undue power e<erted 1! /orporate interests6 the! ar#ue that pu1li/ relations
undermines demo/ra/! and stifles or distorts de1ates.
Chile the eiden/e from the we1sites and 1est sellin# 1ooks (M/)ie6
4001) is distur1in# and demands en#a#ement rather than dismissal6 it should 1e
noted that these are popular rather than a/ademi/ outputs and the! atta/k the
sele/ted instan/es of a1use rather than dis/uss what mi#ht 1e le#itimate pu1li/
relations a/tiit!6 or the P; efforts of /ounterF/orporate /ampai#ns.
$ore pu1li/ relations te<ts6 with the e</eption of the s/hools of rhetori/
and /riti/al theor! (see 1elow) proide a kind of mirror ima#e to these /riti/al
oi/es+ issues of propa#anda6 past and present are lar#el! a1sent from the
de1ate and persuasion is often mar#inalised.. For e<ample6 Cil/o< et al (400')
deote two pa#es out of oer &E0 to the su1,e/t of propa#anda3 %eitel (1>>4) has
no referen/es in the inde<. Molone! (4000) notes that 8faoura1le literature (1!
a/ademi/s and authors who hae worked in P;) adopts arious approa/hes to
the propa#anda link+ i#nore it and/or define P; in a wa! whi/h dissoles or
&
Persuasion Ethics
redu/es the linka#e9 (p?E). 0his is illustrated when Aruni# and "unt (1>?G) lo/ate
propa#anda in the oneFwa! transmission 8press a#entr!9 model6 the first of their
four models6 1ut then distan/e it from /urrent pu1li/ relations 1! pla/in# the
propa#andist 8phase9 of pu1li/ relations6 /learl! in the 1>th /entur!. Chen
des/ri1in# pu1li/ relations /ontri1ution to war efforts6 for e<ample6 alternatie
terms are used su/h as $utlip9s (1>?E) 8dramati/ demonstrations of the power of
organised prom otion to kindle a ferent patriotism (m! itali/s)9 (p'1). Later he
des/ri1es propa#anda as 8that dirt! wordI. 9 (p'&>).
Persuasion is hi#her up the s/ale6 /oered in the twoFwa! as!mmetri/al
model of /ommuni/ation6 thou#h it is still 8inferior9 to the e</ellent two wa!
s!mmetri/al ideal. Aruni# (4001) has reised his models to in/lude a mi<edF
moties model6 /om1inin# the ne#otiatin# aspe/ts of as!mmetr! with the ideals
of s!mmetr!. Jeertheless6 persuasion is still iewed with distaste6 it would
appear6 and persuasion ethi/s are not e<plored in depth within s!stems theor!
approa/hes.
%/hools of rhetori/ are6 of /ourse6 1ased on the stud! of persuasion and
1rin# this to the pu1li/ relations /urri/ulum6 drawin# on the tea/hin#s of Dristotle
and more re/entl! =urke (1>&&)6 amon# others ("eath6 400130oth and "eath
1>>4 ). 0hese approa/hes e<amine the s!m1oli/ e</han#es of meanin# and
tend to /on/entrate on the ado/a/! model of pu1li/ relations (see 1elow).
"oweer6 while this is e<tensiel! tau#ht in the U% there is no eiden/e of
rhetori/ pla!in# a part in the pu1li/ relations /urri/ulum in the U) (Fawkes and
0en/h6 400G). 0his ma! a//ount for transatlanti/ differen/es in attitudes to
persuasion and persuasion ethi/s.
*uropean s/holars9 hae tended to anal!se propa#anda and persuasion
as aspe/ts of e/onomi/ power and so/ial /ontrol of media and other /hannels of
/ommuni/ation (e.#. the Frankfurt s/hool and /riti/al/politi/al e/onom!
approa/hes) rather than the empiri/al resear/h /ondu/ted in the U%. 0his has
sometimes led to an e<a##eration of media power (/hara/terised as the
8h!perdermi/ model9) and the e</lusion of indiidual and #roup responses to
messa#es. =ut the stren#th has 1een a keen e!e for the 1i##er pi/ture6 as is
7
Persuasion Ethics
illustrated in the model of the ps!/holo#! of /ommuni/ation 1! the Aerman
s/holar Malet2ke (1>&') whi/h is e<amined in more detail 1elow.
0he other nota1le /ontri1ution to the stud! of persuasion and its role in
pu1li/ relations /omes from "a1ermas9 (1>?>) /on/ept of the pu1li/ sphere 7 the
arena in whi/h pu1li/ dis/ourse o//urs. "e iews persuasion as unethi/al due to
the ine@ualities of interests 1etween persuader and persuadee. "oweer6 #ien
the dominan/e of persuasie messa#es6 politi/al and /ommer/ial6 in the pu1li/
sphere6 Molone! (4000) su##ests the term should 1e reised to the 8persuasie
sphere9.
From the a1oe6 it mi#ht 1e /on/luded that the reason persuasion6
propa#anda and pu1li/ relations s/holars rarel! refer to ea/h others9 work is that
the! hae nothin# in /ommon. "oweer6 L9*tan# (1>>&6 400G6 400&) has
demonstrated that this is a failure of nere rather than an e<traF,urisdi/tional
issue. Ceaer et al (400&) /on/lude that Kthe /riti/al theor! perspe/tieI finds
no su1stantie differen/e 1etween propa#anda and pu1li/ relations.. this is a
/onse@uen/e of a re,e/tion of the notions that propa#anda ne/essaril! operates
/ounter to the pu1li/ interest6 and that pu1li/ relations ne/essaril! works for the
pu1li/ interestL (p41). Pie/2ka (1>>&) ar#ues that 8there has 1een a lon#
/ampai#n to distan/e pu1li/ relations from propa#anda 1! assertin# its ethi/al
pra/ti/es and /ontri1ution to demo/ra/!96 1ut6 as she sa!s6 assertions are not
proof.
0his paper shares the iew of Jaksa and Prit/hard (1>>G) that 8it /annot 1e
seriousl! maintained that all persuasion is 1ad or undesira1le9 (p14?). 5ndeed6 A.
Miller (1>?>) famousl! ar#ues that despite minor te/hni/al differen/es6 the
similarities 1etween pu1li/ relations and persuasion are 8oerwhelmin#9. 5t would
appear that the moral repu#nan/e atta/hed to the term propa#anda has spread
to its nei#h1our persuasion6 despite the fa/t that our entire /ulture is permeated
with persuasie messa#es6 from health /ampai#ns to toothpaste ads. 5t is diffi/ult
to /on/eie of or#anisational /ommuni/ation whi/h does not /ontain some
persuasie /ontent6 if onl! in the sele/tion of material for the parti/ular pu1li/.
M! iew is that the relu/tan/e to en#a#e with persuasion and understand
its workin#s has eroded the possi1ilit! of framin# effe/tie ethi/s. 5t is an unF
?
Persuasion Ethics
inte#rated aspe/t of the field that6 like Jun#9s /on/ept of the shadow %elf6 festers
in the dark. Dnd like all /reatures left in the dark6 it #rows more powerful in the
ima#ination the less it is a/tuall! /onfronted and e<amined.
Man! s/holars hae sou#ht to define the differen/es 1etween the su1,e/ts
areas dis/ussed a1oe. %ome6 as su##ested6 refer to the emotional /ontent of
the messa#e as indi/ators of propa#anda (Jaksa and Prit/hard6 1>>G)3 others to
the intent (0a!lor6 40013 Molone!6 4000). 5t is not m! intention to e<plore the
demar/ations 1etween the fields here6 simpl! to demonstrate that the! are not
easil! drawn. 0he followin# ta1le illustrates the pro1lem+
+
%ale &
Propaganda Persuasion Public Relations
The deliberate and systematic
attempt to shape perceptions,
manipulate cognitions and direct
behaviour to achieve a response
that furthers the desired intent of
the propagandist
Jowett and ODonnell 1992, p. 4
A successful intentional effort at
influencing another's mental state
through communication in a
circumstance in which the
persuadee has some measure of
freedom
O'Keefe, 2002, p. 5
The planned and sustained effort
to establish and maintain
goodwill and understanding
between an organisation and its
publics.
UK Institute of Puli! "elations
#IP"$, 19%&
A propaganda modeltraces the
routes by which money and
power are able to filter out the
news fit to print, marginalise
dissent and allow the government
and dominant private interests to
get their messages across to the
public
'e()an and *+o)s,-, 19%%
Persuasion is an activity or
process in which a communicator
attempts to induce a change in the
belief, attitude, or behavior of
another person or group of
persons through the transmission
of a message in a context in
which the persuadee has some
degree of free choice
Pe(loff, 200.
The art and social science of
analysing trends, predicting their
consequences, counselling
organisation leaders and
implementing planned
programmes of action which will
serve both the organisations and
the public interest.
/e0i!an state)ent 1il!o0 1992,
p2
Public relations serves a
propaganda function in the press
agent!publicity model.
Practitioners spread the faith of
the organisation involved, often
through incomplete, distorted or
half"true information
3(uni4 and 'unt, 19%4, p.21
#thos $the credibility or charisma
of the spea%er& ' logos $the
nature of the message& ' pathos
$the response of the audience&
Aristotle
.. the planned persuasion to
change adverse public opinion or
reinforce public opinion and the
evaluation of results for future
use
Pea,e 19%0, !ited in 3(uni4 and
'unt, 19%4. p&
A practical process of persuasion
.. it is an inherently neutral
concept. (e should discard
any notions of propaganda being
)good or )bad, and use those
terms merely to describe effective
or ineffective propaganda
5a-lo(, 200.
*ecause both persuader and
persuadee stand to have their
needs fulfilled, persuasion is
regarded as more mutually
satisfying than propaganda
Jowett and ODonnell, 1992, p.
21
The discipline concerned with the
reputation of organisations $or
products, services or individuals&
with the aim of earning
understanding and support.
*IP"
situations where attempts are
made to modify +attitudes and!or,
behavior by symbolic
transactions $messages& that are
the process of attempting to
exert symbolic control over the
evaluative predispositions
$)attitudes, )images etc.& and
>
Persuasion Ethics
sometimes, but not always, lin%ed
with coercive force $indirectly
coercive& and that appeal to the
reason and emotions of the
intended persuadee$s& /ille(,
19%9
subsequent behaviours of relevant
publics or clienteles
/ille(, 19%9, p4&
(sour/e+ Fawkes6 400&1)
Public relations role models and the ethics of persuasion
0his se/tion seeks to /orrelate the ke! role models for pu1li/ relations with
their attitudes to persuasion and to the ethi/s of persuasion. 5t will not look at
other fields of ethi/s6 su/h as /orporate so/ial responsi1ilit!6 whi/h are widel!
/oered elsewhere. 5t follows the approa/h of $urtin and =o!nton (4001) who
looked at /ertain theoreti/al perspe/ties in the li#ht of )ohl1er#9s (1>?16 1>?G)
t!polo#! of si< sta#es of moral reasonin#. 0his takes a different an#le6 1!
e<aminin# 1riefl! the de#ree to whi/h four models of pu1li/ relations en#a#e with
persuasion and persuasion ethi/s. 0he four models 7 boundary spanner6
advocate, relationship m anager and propagandist 7 are sele/ted 1e/ause the!
dominate the de1ate a1out the roles pu1li/ relations pra/titioner take6 or in some
/ases should take6 in their dealin#s with emplo!ers and with so/iet! as a whole.
1) boundary spanner
a' !escri"tion of role
0he 1oundar! spanner role is /entral to s!stems theor!F1ased
/ommuni/ation. 5t sees the e</ellent /ommuni/ator as the ke! pla!er with a//ess
to internal stakeholders ia the dominant /oalition and salient e<ternal
stakeholders. 0heir role is des/ri1ed as KIindiiduals within the or#ani2ation
who fre@uentl! intera/t with the or#ani2ationMs enironment and who #ather6
sele/t6 and rela! information from the enironment to de/ision makers in the
dominant /oalition. K (Chite H Do2ier6 1>>46 p >').
10
Persuasion Ethics
0his role a/hiees its hi#hest leel in s!mmetri/ /ommuni/ation when the
full ran#e of ne#otiatin# and diplomati/ skills (L9*tan#6 400&) is deplo!ed to
se/ure positie out/omes for all parties+ K5n the twoFwa! s!mmetri/ model..
pra/titioners sere as mediators 1etween or#anisations and their pu1li/s. 0heir
#oal is mutual understandin# 1etween pra/titioners and their pu1li/sL.(Aruni#
and "unt6 1>?G6 p44).
0he resonan/e of this statement /an 1e seen in the definition for pu1li/
relations as whole offered 1! the U) $hartered 5nstitute of Pu1li/ relations
($5P;)+ K0he planned and sustained effort to esta1lish and maintain #oodwill and
understandin# 1etween an or#anisation and its pu1li/s.L (198!
' oun!ary s"anners an! "ersuasion
0he de#ree of persuasion e<er/ised 1! 1oundar! spanners is dependent
upon the de#ree of as!mmetr! in the /ommuni/ation+ in a s!stem of 1alan/es
and /ounter1alan/es6 the more im1alan/e6 the more persuasion (and therefore
the less ethi/s). Aruni# (1>>4) /on/ludes that issues of persuasion hae 1een
rele#ated to the mar#ins 1! the deelopment of the s!mmetri/al model+
KPersuasion is less releant than other pro/esses (su/h as ne#otiation) when a
s!mmetri/al model of pu1li/ relations is pra/ti/ed K (p17E). 0he impli/ation that
ne#otiation is not part of persuasion would 1e /hallen#ed 1! most persuasion
s/holars. More re/entl!6 Aruni# (4001) has deeloped the mi<edFmoties model6
/om1inin# the ideals of s!mmetr! with the eer!da! realit! of persuasion.
"oweer6 the /ommon per/eption that onl! the s!mmetri/al model is ethi/al
persists (L9*tan#6 400&).
c' oun!ary s"anners an! ethics
Ds stated a1oe6 the 1oundar! spanner role is /on/eied as onl! trul!
ethi/al when it is s!mmetri/all! 1alan/ed 1etween the or#anisation and its
pu1li/s. 5ndeed6 Kit is diffi/ult6 if not impossi1le6 to pra/ti/e pu1li/ relations in a
wa! that is ethi/al and so/iall! responsi1le usin# an as!mmetri/al modelL
(Aruni#6 1>>46 p 17E).
11
Persuasion Ethics
0he *</ellen/e pro,e/t has /on/entrated on /reatin# s!stems usin# the
s!mmetri/al model as the 1ase and lettin# the stru/ture determine the ethi/al
alue. 0he ori#inal (Aruni# and "unt6 1>?G) des/riptions of these models said
er! little a1out other ethi/al /onsiderations6 sae for some dis/ussion of the 8will
to 1e ethi/al9 and /onsiderations a1out the risks of whistleF1lowin#. 0he ethi/s of
persuasion6 for e<ample6 are not addressed 1e/ause persuasion is seen as+ Kthe
rhetori/ of Dristotle6 in whi/h the rhetori/ian dis/oers or inents the Npossi1le
means of persuasion in referen/e to an! su1,e/t whatsoeerN (=ooth6 1>?1 p.'16
/ited in Aruni#6 1>>46 pG? ).
Dlthou#h detailed s!stems theor! approa/hes to ethi/s are deeloped 1!
=iins (1>>46 400G) and M/*lreath (1>>7)6 oerall the pro,e/t tends to fo/us on
/odes and idealised or e</ellent 1ehaiour parti/ularl! re#ardin# dut! to /lient
and so/iet!. 0he /ore te<ts referred to elsewhere ma! in/lude a pa#e or two on
ethi/s at most6 1ut proide nothin# of real help to the noi/e pra/titioner6
preferrin# to rel! on $odes for #uidan/e. "oweer these are usuall! i#nored
1e/ause no or#anisation is prepared to lose mem1ers to impose standards3
indeed some (like Parkinson6 4001) a#ue that /odes like that of the Pu1li/
;elations %o/iet! of Dmeri/a (P;%D) are desi#ned more to improe the
reputation of the profession than to /ontrol its standards of 1ehaiour. D re/ent
anal!sis of these /odes ("arrison and Aallowa!6 400E) su##ests that most
pra/titioners a1sor1 the messa#e that the! should do the 1est the! /an without
,eopardisin# their /areers. 0his iew is reinfor/ed 1! the Alo1al Dllian/e on
Pu1li/ ;elations Proto/ol (4004) whi/h e<pli/itl! pla/es the interests of /lients6
emplo!ers and the profession of pu1li/ relations a1oe that of so/iet! or other
pu1li/s and whose pream1le states that 8ethi/al performan/e6 not prin/iples6 is
ultimatel! what /ounts9 without refle/tin# that ethi/al de/isions stem from ethi/al
prin/iples. %ome supporters of this approa/h insist that P; is ethi/al 1e/ause
8throu#h their work6 pu1li/ relations professionals promote mutual understandin#
and pea/eful /oe<isten/e amon# indiiduals and institutions9 (%ei1 H Fit2patri/k6
1>>E6 p1). 0he 1oundar! spanner (s!mmetri/al) role is also sometimes /alled the
8so/ial /ons/ien/e9 or een 8ethi/al #uardian9 of an or#anisation6 thou#h L9*tan#
(400') @uestions the @ualifi/ations of pu1li/ relations professional for su/h a title.
14
Persuasion Ethics
0he ima#e of the ethi/al 1oundar! spanner6 offerin# /hannels of
/ommuni/ation 1etween or#anisations and their pu1li/s6 dominates the
/on/eptualisation of pu1li/ relations6 informs attitudes to /orporate so/ial
responsi1ilit!6 issues mana#ement and man! other aspe/ts of the field. 0his is
o1iousl! testament to its salien/e6 1ut as others hae pointed out ("olt2hausen6
L9*tan#) it is popular with proFP; oi/es 1e/ause it #lorifies their /ontri1ution to
demo/ra/!6 and so/ial pro#ress and aoids awkward dis/ussion of its
inolement with histori/al or /ontemporar! propa#anda.
5t is important to note that the /riti@ue of persuasion from this perspe/tie
/on/erns the out/omes of the /ommuni/ation6 that is6 the de#ree to whi/h one
part! surrenders their interests. 0here is not an e<amination of the ethi/s of the
/ommuni/ation a/t itself. 0his is true of man! e<aminations of ethi/al de/ision
makin# in pu1li/ relations whi/h /oer the details of ethi/al 1usiness 1ehaiour6
su/h as whether pra/titioners should work for to1a//o firms6 1ut not the ethi/s
of the a/tual /ommuni/ation. 5ndeed seeral onl! refer to pu1li/ relations in
re#ard to the reputational risks and opportunities of ethi/al de/isionFmakin#. Dll
the /omments in this paper /on/ern the ethi/s of /ommuni/ation6 not 1usiness.
2) Advocate
a' !escri"tion of role
0his model re/o#nises that pu1li/ relations often pla!s a more
as!mmetri/al or persuasie role than is en/ompassed 1! the 1oundar! spanner.
:ne iew lo/ates this approa/h in marketpla/e theor!6 (Fit2patri/k and =ronstein6
400&) whi/h ar#ues that all or#anisations are entitled to hae a oi/e and that
demo/ra/! relies on oters de/idin# whi/h oi/es to heed. 5t is stron#l! U%DF
1ased6 /itin# the First Dmendment as inspiration6 as well as so/ial responsi1ilit!
theor! (%ie1ert6 Peterson H %hramm6 1>E&).
KMarketpla/e theor! is predi/ated6 first on the e<isten/e of an o1,e/tie
8truth9 that will emer#e from a /a/ophon! of oi/es promotin# arious interests3
se/ond on a marketpla/e in whi/h all /iti2ens hae the ri#htF and perhaps the
1'
Persuasion Ethics
means 7 to 1e 1oth heard and informed3 and third6 on the rational a1ilit! if people
to dis/ern 8truth9 K(Fit2patri/k pG).
Dnother approa/h to ado/a/! is 1ased on rhetori/al theor! ("eath6 40013
0oth and "eath6 1>>4) and addresses the role of persuasion in /ommuni/ation6
datin# 1a/k to Dristotle and stron#l! linked to /on/epts of demo/ra/!. 5t studies
the skills of de1ate and ar#umentF emplo!in# s!m1ols as well as te<ts F rather
than so/ial relations or power im1alan/es6 1ut has e<tensie ethi/al s!stems as
issues of trust and dialo#ue are /entral to rhetori/.
0he ado/a/! model is fairl! un/riti/al6 espe/iall! as presented 1!
Fit2patri/k and =ronstein6 of the workin#s and moralit! of the free market6 1ut
does re/o#nise that ado/a/! /arries the risk of persuasion shadin# into
propa#anda6 whi/h is wh! this is the area whi/h appears to hae #enerated the
most ideas a1out the ethi/s of persuasion.
' a!(ocacy an! "ersuasion
Ds the term implies6 ado/a/! is essentiall! persuasie. Persuasion is not
seen as inherentl! #ood or 1ad 1ut as the stuff of human intera/tion+ K0hrou#h
statement and /ounterstatement6 people test ea/h other9s iews of realit!6 alue6
and /hoi/es releant to produ/ts6 seri/es and pu1li/ poli/ies.L ("eath6 40016 p
'1). "oweer this is /ontradi/ted 1! apparent distaste for the idea of persuasion6
e<pressed in the 1elief (hopeO) that s/holars are more interested in /onfli/t
resolution toda! and that Ken#ineerin# /onsent is in the past .. in pra/ti/e as well
as theor! K(i1id6 p4). Chereas s!stems theor! /on/entrates on the or#anisation9s
links and 1alan/es6 rhetori/ 8 is a rationale of dis/ourse.. prote/ted 1! ado/a/!9
(i1id pG). D#ain the arena for su/h dis/ourse is enisa#ed as a free market pla/e
wherein all ideas /an 1e e@uall! e</han#ed.
0here are similarities here with "a1ermas9 ideas of dialo#i/
/ommuni/ation (eoled from dis/ourse ethi/s) and of the pu1li/ sphere.
=urleson and )line (1>7>) summarised his prin/iples as+ a) parti/ipants must
hae an e@ual /han/e to initiate and maintain dis/ourse3 1) parti/ipants must
hae an e@ual /han/e to make /hallen#es6 e<planations6 or interpretations3 /)
1G
Persuasion Ethics
intera/tion amon# parti/ipants must 1e free of manipulations6 domination6 or
/ontrol3 and d) parti/ipants must 1e e@ual with respe/t to power (p G4').
0he Fit2patri/k and =ronstein approa/h is more firml! rooted in the U%
First Dmendment and ,urispruden/e6 in other words /loser to the model of the
le#al ado/ate. 0his su##ests two pro1lems+ one is the /ultural 1ias inoled in
/reatin# a set of ethi/s lo/ated so firml! in one national le#al s!stem3 the other is
the a1sen/e of a (metaphori/al) /ourt room6 a /ourt appointed opponent6 a silent
forum where ar#uments ma! 1e stated and /ross e<amined6 let alone the
presidin# ,ud#e summin# up for the ,ur!. 0his is a lon# wa! from the "a1ermas
ideal 7 indeed he is onl! referen/ed on/e in their 1ook Ethics in Public "elations
# "esponsible $dvocacy (400&) and then in a different /onte<t.
c' A!(ocacy an! ethics
Despite the limitations su##ested in the last para#raph6 ado/a/! ethi/s
does re/o#nise the need for /onstraints within the free market pla/e and
su##ests that these should inole awareness of fa/tors su/h as a//ess6
pro/ess6 truth and dis/losure (Fit2patri/k6 400& p').
:ther writers on ethi/s from the rhetori/al perspe/tie su/h as Pearson6
"eath6 %ullian and 0oth hae e<amined the ethi/s of persuasion at depth. 0he
followin# two proposals draw on this 1a/k#round to formulate a set of @uestions
the ado/ate should ask themseles in order to as/ertain the de#ree of ethi/s in
their persuasie /ommuni/ation.
. =aker (1>>>) su##ests that pu1li/ relations pra/titioners tend to use one
of fie 8,ustifi/ations for persuasion96 as follows+
self interest (what%s in it for m e&!'
entitlement (if it%s legal, its ethical)3
enli#htened selfFinterest (ethical behaviour is good business
sense!'
so/ial responsi1ilit! (personal practice has an im pact on larger
society)3 and
1E
Persuasion Ethics
kin#dom of ends (the highest standards should be provided for and
e(pected from all! (m! summar! in itali/s).
0his e/hoes )ohl1er#9s (1>?116 1>?G) t!polo#! of si< sta#es of moral
reasonin#6 from preF/onentional6 selfF/entred responses6 throu#h /onentional6
work and professionF/entred thinkin#6 to post /onentional6 so/iet!F/entred
reasonin#. 5t should 1e noted that Martinson (1>>G) re,e/ted the /on/ept that
enli#htened self interest /ould 1e /onsidered as an ethi/al position6 and 1!
inferen/e the three leels 1elow this.
*d#ett (4004) has /reated ten /riteria for ethi/all! desira1le ado/a/!6
whi/h e/ho the approa/h outlined a1oe and whi/h oerlap to some de#ree with
the fie prin/iples proposed 1! =aker and Martinson (4004)6 whi/h the! /all the
0D;*% test+
1) %ruthfulness 7 not merel! truth+ s/holars hae hi#hli#hted the ethi/al
pitfalls of sele/tie release of information. %/hi/k (1>>G) de/lares that Kthe
intention of withholdin# a truth is to de/eieL and Martinson (1>>&) sa!s that if the
pu1li/ relations pra/titioner is to pra/tise ethi/al persuasion6 the! Kmust adopt
truthfulness as a norm I hae internalised it as a alue and I 1e eer i#ilant in
re/o#nisin# that those ineita1le temptations to /ommuni/ate somewhat less
than su1stantiall! /omplete information must 1e taken for what the! are 7
temptations to manipulate others for the pra/titioner9s own6 or a /lient9s6 selfish
endsL (pG&).
4) Authenticity 7 relates to personal and professional inte#rit!. KD #ood
test for authenti/it! is whether the pra/titioner is willin# to openl!6 pu1li/l! and
personall! 1e identified as the persuader in a parti/ular /ir/umstan/eL (=aker
and Martinson6 4004 p n.k.)
') )es"ect 7 refers to the autonom! of the audien/e. 0here is some e/ho
here of the terms of parti/ipation in the pu1li/ sphere su##ested 1! "a1ermas
(see a1oe). K0he ethi/al persuader6 we ar#ue6 /onsiders those to whom
/ommuni/ation messa#es are dire/ted as persons of di#nit! who are owed
respe/t 1! the er! fa/t that the! are human 1ein#s.L (i1id p n.k.)
G) *+uity F relates to fairness6 not manipulation6 in terms of a//ess6
lan#ua#e and other issues of parit!.
1&
Persuasion Ethics
E) Social )es"onsiility F this en/oura#es awareness of the effe/ts of
/ommuni/ation on the wider so/iet!6 1e!ond the immediate pu1li/s or /lients.
0his is an attra/tie approa/h in man! wa!s+ it is /lear3 it addresses the
personalit! of the /ommuni/ator and asks them to refle/t on their own moties
and 1ehaiours. 5t also /on/entrates on the /ommuni/ation itself 7 whether the
messa#e is for health or arms promotion6 the a/t of persuasion is seen as hain#
at least the potential to 1e ethi/al 7 a refreshin# /han#e from some of the earlier
approa/hes outlines a1oe. 0here are still a num1er of pro1lems+ the issue of
pu1li/s hain# e@ualit! of a//ess to /ommer/iall! sensitie information is not
addressed3 the ine@ualities of resour/es likewise. Dnd as the prop#anda model
dis/ussed 1elow indi/ates6 it is hard to insist that pu1li/ relations pra/titioners
aspire to6 let alone pra/ti/e6 su/h standards. Jeertheless6 despite the failure to
re/o#nise power relationships in /ommuni/ation (L9*tan#6 1>>&)6 as in so/iet!6
there is /onsidera1le en#a#ement with the ethi/s of persuasion here.
3) Relationship manager
a' !escri"tion of role
0his model is 1ased on relationship theor! and /entres on the role of
pu1li/ relations professionals in ne#otiatin# a /omple< set of relationships inside
and outside /lient/emplo!er or#anisations (Ledin#ham and =runin#6 4000). 5t
fo/uses on the relational6 appl!in# /on/epts from interpersonal relationships to
or#anisationalFpu1li/ /ommuni/ations. ;elationship mana#ement draws on a
ariet! of theoreti/al dis/iplines to identif! the elements that make up a positie
relationship6 su/h as3 /ontrol mutualit!6 trust6 satisfa/tion6 /ommitment6 e</han#e
relationship and /ommunal relationship ("on and Aruni#6 1>>>). Unlike some of
the or#anisationF/entred perspe/tie of s!stems theor! approa/hes to pu1li/
relations6 it takes the standpoint of the pu1li/s (Leit/h H Jeilson6 4001). Jahoon2i
(400&) su##ests that this is partiall! due to /ultural and te/hnolo#i/al shifts whi/h
hae empowered pu1li/s and fa/ilitated international dialo#ue and/or /oalitions.
17
Persuasion Ethics
' relationshi" mana,ement an! "ersuasion
K0he relationship perspe/tie has the potential to shift pu1li/ relations
pra/titioners awa! from usin# persuasie /ommuni/ation as a tool to manipulate
pu1li/ opinion towards 1uildin# and maintainin# mutuall! 1enefi/ial or#anisationF
pu1li/ relationshipsL Jahoon2i (p7?).
0his implies that persuasion is inherentl! unethi/al and manipulatie 7 a
iew that /an 1e /hallen#ed (see 1elow). 5n other words it seeks to aoid
persuasion and a/hiee /onsensus throu#h relationship 1uildin#6 a#ain assumin#
these two /on/epts are mutuall! e</lusie. Jahoon2i notes that the
/ommuni/ation aspe/ts of the relationship are so far undere<plored and ar#ues
for a deeper understandin# of transparen/! (a term also used 1! ado/a/! and
rhetori/al s/holars). K0raditional models of mass /ommuni/ation6 #rounded in
persuasion and manipulation6 are far from suffi/ient to e<plain and predi/t the
intri/a/ies of pu1li/ relations as it in/reasin#l! moes toward a /entral fo/us on
relationships within the or#ani2ationFpu1li/ /onte<t.L (p401) 0his is one of onl!
two referen/es to persuasion in Ledin#ham and =runin# (4000) and a#ain
persuasion and manipulation are used s!non!mousl!.
c' relationshi" mana,ement an! ethics
0he ethi/s of relationship mana#ement re#ardin# persuasie
/ommuni/ation and other /ommuni/ation seem undere<plored6 parti/ularl! in the
la/k of a deeloped theor! of relationship dialo#ue. Jahoon2i (i1id) /ites )ent and
0a!lor (4004) as ar#uin# that dialo#ue is Kone of the most ethi/al forms of
/ommuni/ation and Ione of the /entral means of separatin# truth from
falsehoodL (p44). Da! (1>>?) illustrates this 1! su##estin# that national /odes of
pra/ti/e are likel! to refle/t spe/ifi/ /ultural alues and assumptions and that onl!
dialo#ue /an proide the 1asis for 8/ommon #round9. 0his su##ests that
relationship theor! has mu/h in /ommon with rhetori/ and shares an interest in
"a1ermas9 /ommuni/atie a/tion and pu1li/ sphere approa/h. Da! et al (4001)
1?
Persuasion Ethics
reiterate the importan/e of dialo#i/ /ommuni/ation as the emer#in# theme in
pu1li/ relations theor! for the 41
st
/entur!6 a iew shared 1! Aruni# (4001)6
su##estin# a real /oner#en/e of alues in this area oer the past fie or si<
!ears. 5t seems likel! that relationship mana#ement will emer#e as the dominant
paradi#m for pu1li/ relations in the near future.
"oweer6 as with all the approa/hes outlined a1oe6 it is relu/tant to
en#a#e with the realities of power relationships+ it minimises the o1sta/les to
relationship /reated 1! power im1alan/es. Man! of the most important
/ommuni/ation issues fa/in# this /entur! from #lo1al warmin# to reli#ious
fundamentalism raise @uestions /on/ernin# the relatie power of those seekin#
to esta1lish dialo#ue.
4) Propagandist
a) !escri"tion of role
Chile the preiousl! /oered models share an optimisti/ iew of how
pu1li/ relations /an or does /ontri1ute to demo/ra/! and what %ei1 and
Fit2patri/k (1>>E) /alled 8so/ial harmon!96 this iew is not uniersal. 5t is worth
/onsiderin# the theories underpinnin# the atta/ks on the field 7 whi/h are usuall!
i#nored or dismissed 7 in order to hi#hli#ht the nature of the #ap in per/eption
1etween pu1li/ relations s/holars and their /riti/s. 5t is also worth notin# that
these iews are most likel! to hi#hli#ht issues of power6 al1eit in a sometimes
distorted manner. 0his 8propa#anda9 iew of pu1li/ relations is proposed 1!
authors su/h as D. Miller (400G)6 %tau1er and ;ampton ( 400G)6 $homsk! (4004)
and *wen (1>>&)6 amon# others. 0he! write e<tremel! popular 1ooks6 run
we1sites and make do/umentaries a1out the mali#n influen/e of pu1li/ relations
on pu1li/ life. 0heir ante/edents are the Frankfurt %/hool (Ddorno6 =en,amin et/)
who /on/eptualised the media as er! powerful in 1>'0s Aerman! (whi/h also
influen/ed "a1ermas6 thou#h he has responded 1! /onstru/tin# more hopeful
isions of /ommuni/ation).
1>
Persuasion Ethics
0he propa#anda model deeloped 1! "erman and $homsk! (1>??) and
$homsk! (4004) su##ests that 8free9 press /an 1e manipulated to sere
#oernmental and 1usiness interests a1oe others 1! a ariet! of means6 su/h
as /ontrollin# a//ess and 1! framin# de1ates to the iews of the dominant for/es
in so/iet! oer dissentin# oi/es. 0his also ar#ues that the main purpose of what
was then $old Car propa#anda was not to terrif! the enem! 1ut to intimidate the
domesti/ population into /on/edin# more power and authorit! to the state. 0his
iew has 1een updated to respond to the Car on 0error ($urtis6 400G). 0he role
of pu1li/ relations in shapin# politi/al6 militar! and /orporate /ommuni/ations6 not
,ust pu1li/it!6 is seen as inherentl! propa#andist and there is some anal!sis of
the num1ers of personnel emplo!ed 1! these or#anisations to promote their
iews.
0raditionall! s/holars who stud! propa#anda /on/entrate on its wartime
appli/ation6 in/ludin# re/ent wars like the 400' war in 5ra@ (0a!lor 400').
"oweer6 there are in/reasin# num1ers of a/ademi/s6 ,ournalists and
/ampai#ners who are e<aminin# the role of pu1li/ relations in what the! /all
/orporate propa#anda. 0he! ar#ue not onl! that wartime propa#anda te/hni@ues
hae 1een e<tended into eer!da! /ommuni/ations as responses first to the
threat (or per/eied threat6 see $urtis op /it) of /ommunism and more re/entl! as
part of the 8war on terror9 ($homsk! 4004) 1ut that adertisin# and pu1li/
relations are inoled in e/onomi/ propa#anda 0a!lor (400').
Chile it is interestin# to see pu1li/ relations iewed throu#h this lens6 and
offers a health! /orre/tie to some of the roseFtinted iews of pu1li/ relations9
impa/t on so/iet!6 it should 1e remem1ered that there is er! little dis/ussion of
the wider ran#e of pu1li/ relations a/tiit!3 indeed unlike the approa/hes outlined
earlier6 the! see it as /onsistin# of nothin# 1ut propa#anda.
1) Pro"a,an!a an! "ersuasion
Like some of the other models outlined a1oe6 these /riti/s assume
persuasion is the same as propa#anda and often fail to distin#uish 1etween
t!pes of /ommuni/ation. "ealth /ampai#ns6 for e<ample6 are rarel! atta/ked F
40
Persuasion Ethics
unless the! turn out to 1e dis#uisin# a /ommer/ial interest. 0here is sometimes a
/onflation of /ommuni/ation and /orporate 1usiness+ it is the or#anisational
pra/ti/es whi/h are atta/ked rather than the /ommuni/ation. :ften howeer6
or#anisations su/h as the U%F1ased $entre for Media and Demo/ra/!
(www.prwatch.org)6 reeal how Kpu1li/ relations wi2ards /on/o/t and spin the
news6 or#ani2e phone! K#rassrootsL front #roups6 sp! on /iti2ens6 and /onspire
with lo11!ists and politi/ians to thwart demo/ra/!L6 a//ordin# to its we1site. *a/h
week there are e<amples of dishonest 1ehaiour from reputa1le pu1li/ relations
firms (Dn e<ample from the re/ent press would 1e the e<posure in the U) of a
/ampai#n #roup lo11!in# for panF*uropean a//ess to dru#s6 whi/h turned out to
1e wholl! funded 1! ;o/he pharma/euti/als and or#anised 1! Ce1er %handwi/k
(=e/kett6 )uardian 40/10/400&).)
5t is worth remem1erin# the te/hni@ues of propa#anda identified 1! the
5nstitute of Propa#anda Dnal!sis (Delwi/he6 4004)+ JameF$allin#6 Alitterin#
Aeneralit!6 0ransfer6 0estimonial6 Plain Folks6 $ard %ta/kin#6 and =and Ca#on.
5t is diffi/ult to insist that pu1li/ relations neer emplo!s su/h tools.
/) Pro"a,an!a an! ethics
0he /riti/s /ited here are not reall! interested in deelopin# an ethi/al
framework for pu1li/ relations+ the! want to e<pose rather than reform. "oweer6
one /an refle/t on their ar#uments as /ounter1lasts to the hi#h ethi/al standards
e<horted a1oe. 5t is hard to /all for transparen/! when ma,or pu1li/ relations
firms en#a#e in front or#anisations6 apparentl! without /onse@uen/e. $allin# for
truthfulness in pu1li/ relations seems almost naPe in a time when a ma,or war
has 1een laun/hed on the 1asis of e<tremel! @uestiona1le pu1li/
/ommuni/ations (D.Miller6 400G). Finall! the /riti/s /on/entrate on the
im1alan/es of power whi/h e</ellent pu1li/ relations seeks to aoid 1ut whi/h
keeps /roppin# up in the real world.
0his at least would 1e wel/omed 1! those who /all for #reater refle/tion
on the @uestion of power+ "olt2hausen (4000) points out+ KPostmodern theories
ur#e pu1li/ relations pra/titioners to a/knowled#e the politi/al nature of their
41
Persuasion Ethics
a/tiities and to 1e aware of the power relations inherent in eer!da! pra/ti/eI..
5nstead of /laimin# o1,e/tiit!6 pra/titioners are for/ed to /hoose whi/h side the!
are onL (p110). M/)ie (4001) also /alls for wider en#a#ement with post
modernism and /haos theor! to eole more meanin#ful paradi#ms for
understandin# pu1li/ relations+ 8without ro1ust selfF/riti/ism and selfF@uestionin#
of its frameworks of power6 pu1li/ relations will desere to retain its 1ad name9
(p7>).
ey points
0he followin# ke! points emer#e from the e<amination of the four models
and their approa/hes to persuasion and to ethi/s+
Most theorists dislike persuasion6 see it as inherentl! unethi/al and
su##est how to aoid it
Persuasion itself is rarel! e<plored in an! depth6 so that the
/omple<ities of persuadin# another person or #roup to an! /han#e
in attitudes or 1ehaiour are not /onsidered
Persuasion is pla/ed in opposition to ne#otiation and
understandin#s of pu1li/ interests6 thou#h persuasion s/holars
make it /lear these are all aspe/ts of the persuasie pro/ess
*thi/s are often used to des/ri1e 1usiness de/isions rather than
/ommuni/ation a/ts
0he #roups who re/o#nise the most persuasion hae also eoled
the most detailed ethi/al responses
;elationship mana#ement is emer#in# as the dominant iew of
pu1li/ relations6 1! s/holars at least6 for the 41
st
/entur!. Dll the
approa/hes outlined a1oe stress the alue of dialo#i/
/ommuni/ation
0he literature of persuasie /ommuni/ation is rarel! referen/ed in
an! of the a1oe models
44
Persuasion Ethics
0he /riti/s of pu1li/ relations hi#hli#ht real #aps in /on/eptualisin#
its influen/e in so/iet!6 parti/ularl! in re#ard to power relations.
Research possibilities
Chile L9*tan#6 Molone! and Ceaer hae proposed that pu1li/ relations
/annot 1e automati/all! distan/ed from propa#anda or persuasion this is still a
minorit! iewpoint. 0here remain serious pro1lems to 1e inesti#ated+ for
e<ample6 if the e<istin# definitions do not offer #uidan/e for dis/rimination6 how
/an ethi/al pu1li/ relations 1e more full! delineatedO 0he e<istin# approa/hes
outlined a1oe tend to produ/e a partial des/ription of ethi/al /ommuni/ation
1e/ause the! omit persuasion from the le<i/on of le#itimate pu1li/ relations.
0here is s/ope for more resear/h into le#itima/!+ is persuasion to 1e
a//epta1le a//ordin# to the ends (teleolo#i/al ethi/s) or the means of
/ommuni/ation (deontolo#i/al)O Cho is to determine the ethi/s 7 the sender or
re/eierO 5s persuasion ethi/all! a//epta1le if so/iet! deems it so 7 in whi/h
/ase who is deemed to represent 8so/iet!9 in su/h de1atesO
0here is also a reseroir of interestin# and potentiall! useful theories6
/on/epts and models aaila1le from so/ial and /ommuni/atie ps!/holo#! whi/h
/ould pla! a /entral part in /reatin# a new approa/h to ethi/al persuasion
(Fawkes6400&a). For e<ample6 the M/(uire 5nput/:utput Matri< (1>?>) reminds
pra/titioners that persuasion is more often attempted than a/hieed6 #ien the
man! 1arriers that messa#es hae to oer/ome 1efore su//eedin# in affe/tin#
another9s attitudes let alone 1ehaiour. 0he *la1oration Likelihood Model (Pett!
and $a/ioppo6 1>?&) su##ests two routes to internal persuasion6 the /entral
route whi/h en#a#es the re/eier9s internal pro/essin# and the peripheral route
where1! their attention ma! 1e #ra11ed6 1! /olour6 /ele1rit! or other emotional
/ue 1ut whi/h has shortFlastin# effe/t. Do the same ethi/s appl! to 1oth routesO
Does the /on/ern a1out 8emotional9 messa#es /onstitutin# propa#anda mean
that su/h superfi/ial persuasion /an neer 1e ethi/alO Mi#ht ;aen9s (1>?')
e<amination of power as a dimension of /redi1ilit! pla! a part in understandin#
the role of power relations in persuasie /ommuni/ationO
4'
Persuasion Ethics
5n parti/ular6 5 would like to su##est that the littleFused /ommuni/ation
model of Aerhard Malet2ke 1e reFe<amined for its relean/e to the de1ate
outlined a1oe.
Malet-.e mo!el of the "sycholo,y of communication /&012'
5ma#e taken from http+//www./ultso/k.ndire/t./o.uk/MU"ome//shtml/
Fi#.1 0he Ps!/holo#! of Mass $ommuni/ation6 Malet2ke (1>&')
5 su##est that this somewhat ne#le/ted model is reFe<amined for its
possi1le /ontri1ution to deelopin# an ethi/al framework for persuasie
/ommuni/ation. Dlthou#h it is rarel! referen/ed in pu1li/ relations te<ts6 and
produ/es few results in onFline sear/hes (Aoo#le6 (uestia./om) this model 1!
the Aerman s/holar Aerhard Malet2ke has man! elements to re/ommend it for
use in the /urrent dis/ussion+
5t offers a 8map9 of /ommuni/ation6 showin# all the pla!ers6
in/ludin# the media and all the possi1le /onne/tions 1etween
/ommuni/ators (in/ludin# 1ut not dependin# on media /hannels)
4G
Persuasion Ethics
5t emphasises the ps!/holo#i/al /hara/teristi/s of the parti/ipants
5t shows the /onte<t for /ommuni/ation6 in/ludin# the /ulture of all
parti/ipants
5t hi#hli#hts the /onstraints 7 te/hni/al and so/ial 7 affe/tin# mass
/ommuni/ation a/ts.
5t also has limitations+ it is 1ased on mass /ommuni/ations and assumes
an interenin# media /hannel 7 thou#h this /an 1e su1stituted with fa/e to fa/e6
one to one6 one to man! or man! to one /ommuni/ation without dama#in# the
flow. 5t has ori#ins in leftFri#ht transmission models6 1ut a#ain 1e/ause the
politi/al6 le#al6 so/iolo#i/al and ps!/holo#i/al /onte<ts of or#anisational
/ommuni/ations and pu1li/s are hi#hli#hted this need not mean that the 1ias is
all in the sender. 0his model /ould proide a map of dialo#i/ /ommuni/ation DJD
refle/t the im1alan/es that o//ur in realit! and are not automati/all! unethi/al. 5t
is not wholl! in/ompati1le with the mi<edFmoties models proposed 1! Aruni#6 as
there is s/ope for s!mmetr! and as!mmetr! dependin# on the releant inputs
and outputs.
5n order to restore the role of power in persuasion6 the power d!nami/s of
eer! element needs to 1e hi#hli#hted6 su/h as+
5nternal attitude of pra/titioner to power oer media and oer
pu1li/s
5nternal power relationships in the workin# /onte<t 7 1oth peers and
hierar/hies
5ssues of media power 7 oer sour/es and audien/es
;e/eier power d!nami/s 7 in relation to media and sour/e
or#anisation
0o 1e effe/tie as tool for ethi/al persuasion6 the ethi/al /onte<t would
need to 1e added at ea/h sta#e of the /ommuni/ation. 0his would in/lude3
ethi/al alues of the /ommuni/ator
ethi/al /ulture in whi/h the! operate 7 formal and informal
professional /odes and pra/ti/es of pu1li/ relations professionals
and media of /ommuni/ation
4E
Persuasion Ethics
ethi/al e<pe/tations and alues of pu1li/s /ould all 1e 1rou#ht into
#reater /ons/iousness.
Fi#ure 4 (#ien after referen/es) illustrates how the ethi/al elements mi#ht
1e added.

Conclusion
=e/ause of the relu/tan/e to en#a#e with the su1,e/t of persuasion6 let
alone admit that pu1li/ relations is sometimes s!non!mous with propa#anda6 the
field has not eoled a worka1le set of ethi/s. 0he s!stems theorists9 fo/us on
e</ellen/e has failed to en#a#e with the philosophi/al and ethi/al /omple<ities of
persuasion in eer! da! pra/ti/e. 5n the a1sen/e of dis/ussion the spe/tre of
persuasion has #rown more maleolent and more powerful6 so that it is often
seen as s!non!mous with manipulation. 0he idea of ne#otiation as intrinsi/ to
persuasion is a1sent from mu/h of the dis/ussion. Different models of pu1li/
relations make /onfli/tin# or un,ustified assumptions and /laims a1out ethi/al
responsi1ilities. Man! of the e<istin# ethi/al models state ideals whi/h seem
unlikel! to 1e worka1le 7 a fa/tor whi/h ma! a//ount for their re#ular
mar#inalisation. 0his is not to institutionalise a1usie or unethi/al 1ehaiour.
(uite the reerse+ new ethi/al approa/hes /an onl! 1e e<plored if persuasion is
re/o#nised as a /entral part of pra/ti/e. 0he literature of persuasion should 1e
reiewed for potential /on/epts and models that mi#ht help pu1li/ relations
eole an ethi/al framework that in/orporates realit! rather than starts and ends
with fantas!.
References
*a%er, -., and .artinson, /.0. $1221& 3ut of the 4ed"0ight /istrict5 6ive Principles for #thically
Proactive Public 4elations, Puli! "elations 6ua(te(l- 78.9 pp:;' ', accessed from
www.questia.com -eptember :7,122; $no page numbers available&
*a%er, -. $:<<<& 6ive *aselines for =ustification in Persuasion, Jou(nal of /ass /edia 7t+i!s.
>ol :7.1 pp ?<"<7
*ec%ett, A., $1227& .a%ing of the terror myth, 5+e 3ua(dian, 3ctober :;, 1227
*ernays, #. $:<1@& P(opa4anda, Aew Bor% 0iveright, $122; edition, Cg publishing, AB&
4&
Persuasion Ethics
*ettinghaus, #. P. and Dody, .. =. $:<<7& Pe(suasi8e *o))uni!ation ;
th
#d, 3rlando, 6lorida5
Earcourt *race
*ivins, T.E, $:<<1& A systems model for ethical decision ma%ing in public relations, Puli!
"elations "e8iew, :@. 7 pp 9?;"9@9
*ivins, T.E $1227& /i0ed /edia9 )o(al distin!tions in ad8e(tisin4, puli! (elations and
:ou(nalis), 0awrence #rlbaum Associates, .ahwah, A=
*ooth (. D. $ :<@:&. F.ere rhetoric, rhetoric G the search for common learningF. Cn #. C. *oyer
$#d.&, *o))on lea(nin49 ; *a(ne4ie !ollo<uiu) on 4ene(al edu!ation $pp. 19";;&. (ashington,
/D5 Darnegie 6oundation for the Advancement of Teaching, cited in Hrunig G (hite $:<<1& op
cit
*ur%e, I. $:<??& =an4ua4e as s-)oli! a!tion, *er%eley, Jniversity of Dalifornia Press
*urleson *. 4. and Iline -. 0.$:<8<& Eabermas theory of communication5 A critical
explication. Kuarterly =ournal of -peech, ?;, pp 7:1"79@,
Dhoms%y, A. $1221& /edia *ont(ol, -even -tories Press, Aew Bor%
Durtin, P.A. and *oynton, 0.A., )#thics in Public 4elations Theory and Practice in Eeath $122:&
op cit pp 7::"71:
Durtis, A. $1221& 5+e *entu(- of t+e >elf, **D1, April!.ay 1221
Durtis, A. $1227& The Power of Aightmares5 the 4ise of the Politics of 6ear, **D1, 3ctober 1227
Dutlip, -..., Denter, A.E., and *room, H... $:<@;& 7ffe!ti8e Puli! "elations, ?
th
#d.,
Aew.=ersey , Prentice"Eall
/ay, I./., /ong, K. and 4obins, D., $122:& Public 4elations #thics5 An overview and
/iscussion of Cssues for the 1:
st
Dentury, in Eeath $122:& op cit
/ay I./., $ :<<@& The Problem of ethics in intercultural communication, in I.-. -iteram and ..
Prosser $eds&, Divic /iscourse, >ol :5 .ulticulturalism, cultural diversity and global
communication $pp:"92& Aowood, A=, Ablex, cited in /ay $122:& op cit
/elwiche, A. $1221&, Post"war propaganda. Avalailable online at
http5!!www.propagandacritic.com!articles!ww:.postwar.html $accessed April :9, 122;&
#dgett, 4., )Toward an ethical framewor% for advocacy, Jou(nal of Puli! "elations "esea(!+,
:7$:&, :"1?
#wen, -. $:<<?& P"? ; >o!ial 'isto(- of >pin . Aew Bor%5 *asic *oo%s.
6aw%es, =. $122?a& )Public 4elations, Propaganda and the Psychology of Persuasion in Tench,
4., and Beomans, 0. 70plo(in4 Puli! "elations, Earlow, Prentice"Eall
6aw%es, =. $122?b& 'Dan ethics save public relations from the charge of propagandaL', 7t+i!al
>pa!e, =ournal of the Cnstitute of Dommunication #thics, >ol 9 Ao :, Troubadour Publishing,
0eicester JI pp 91"71
47
Persuasion Ethics
6aw%es, = $forthcoming& )Public relations models and the ethics of persuasion5 a new approach,
conference paper, DCP4 Alan 4awel Academic Donference, 0ondon =uly 1228
6aw%es, =. and Tench, 4. $1227& /oes employer resistance to theory threaten the future of public
relationsL A consideration of research findings, comparing JI practitioner, academic and alumni
attitudes to public relations education, =uly 1227, ::
th
Cnternational Public 4elations 4esearch
-ymposium, *led, -lovenia
6itMpatric%, I and *ornstein, D. $#ds& $122?& 7t+i!al Puli! "elations9 "esponsile ;d8o!a!-,
Thousand 3a%s, DA, -age
6itMpatric%, I., *aselines for #thical Advocacy in the ).ar%etplace of Cdeas, in 6itMpatric% and
*ornstein $122?& op cit, pp :":@
Hlobal Alliance for Public 4elations and Dommunications .anagement, $1221& Hlobal Protocol
on Public 4elations Protocol. Available online at
http5!!www.globalpr.org!%nowledge!ethics!protocol.asp, accessed 3ctober, :1, 122;
Hregory, A. $1227& Powerful P45 a force for the future, -peech to CP4 AH., Aovember.
Available online at http5!!www.cipr.org.u%!Aews!Aewsrameset.htm, accessed 3ctober :1, 122;
Hrunig, =. #., and Eunt, T. $:<@7& /ana4in4 Puli! "elations, Aew Bor%5 Eolt, 4inehart and
(inston
Hrunig. =.#. and (hite =., $:<<1& The #ffect of (orld >iews on Public 4elations Theory and
Practice, in Hrunig et al $:<<1& op cit
Hrunig, =. #., /oMier, /. .., #hling, (.P., Hrunig, 0.A., 4epper, 6.D, and (hite, =. $eds& $:<<1&,
70!ellen!e in Puli! "elations and *o))uni!ation /ana4e)ent, 0awrence #rlbaum, Eillsdale,
A=
Hrunig. =. $122:& Two"(ay -ymmetrical Public 4elations5 Past, Present and 6uture, in Eeath,
$122:& op !it. pp 11@.0
Eabermas, =. $:<@<& 5+e >t(u!tu(al 5(ansfo()ation of t+e Puli! >p+e(e, .CT Press,
.assachusetts
Eall, -. $:<@2& *ultu(al studies9 two pa(adi4). /edia, !ultu(e, and so!iet-, 1, pp ;8"81
Eargreaves, C. $1229& -pinning out of Dontrol, 'isto(- 5oda-, ;9.9.
Earrison, I., and Halloway, D. $122;& Public relations ethics5 A simpler $but not simplistic&
approach to the complexities. Prism 9. Available online at http5!!praxis.massey.ac.nM, accessed on
Eeath, 4.0. $ed.& $122:& 5+e 'andoo, of Puli! "elations, Thousand 3a%s, Dalifornia, -age
Eeath, 4.0., $122:& -hifting 6oundations5 Public 4elations as 4elationship *uilding, in Eeath
$ed& $122:& op cit
Eerman, #.-. and Dhoms%y, A. $:<@@& /anufa!tu(in4 *onsent, 5+e Politi!al 7!ono)- of t+e
/ass /edia, Aew Bor%, Pantheon *oo%s
4?
Persuasion Ethics
EoltMhausen, /. $1222&. Postmodern values in public relations, Jou(nal of Puli! "elations
"esea(!+, :1.:, pp <9"::7
Eon 0., G Hrunig =.#.$:<<<& Huidelines for measuring relationships in public relations $online&,
http5!!www.instituteforpr.com, cited in =ahoonMi $122?& op cit
=a%sa, =.A. and Pritchard. ..-. $:<<7& *o))uni!ato( 7t+i!s9 /et+ods of ;nal-sis, 1nd #d.
*elmont, DA5 (adsworth
=ahoonMi, =. $122?& 4elationships, Transparency and #valuation5 the Cmplications for Public
4elations, in 0#tang, =. G PiecM%a, .. $eds& $122?& op cit, pp ?:"<:
=owett H.-. and 3/onnell, >. $:<<1& P(opa4anda and Pe(suasion, 0ondon, -age
Iohlberg, 0. $:<@:& 5+e p+ilosop+- of )o(al de8elop)ent9 /o(al sta4es and t+e idea of :usti!e $vol
:& Aew Bor%, Earper and 4ow
Iohlberg, 0. $:<@7& 5+e ps-!+olo4- of )o(al de8elop)ent9 /o(al sta4es and t+e life !-!le $vol 1&
Aew Bor%, Earper and 4ow
0#tang, =., $1227& Puli! "elations in A(itain9 ; 'isto(- of t+e P(ofessional P(a!ti!e in t+e 20
t+
*entu(-, Aew =ersey, 0awrence #rlbaum Associates
0#tang, =. $1229& The .yth of the )#thical Huardian5 An #xamination of its origins, potency
and illusions, Jou(nal of *o))uni!ations /ana4e)ent >ol @, : pp ;9"?8
0#tang, =., $:<<@& -tate Propaganda and *ureaucratic Cntelligence5 The Dreation of Public
4elations in 12th Dentury *ritain, Puli! "elations "e8iew, 1.7 pp 799" 77:,
0#tang, =., $:<<?& Dorporate 4esponsibility and Public 4elations #thics, in 0#tang, =., and
PiecM%a, .. $eds& $:<<?& *(iti!al Pe(spe!ti8es in Puli! "elations, 0ondon, CT*P pp @1":2;
0#tang, =. G PiecM%a, .. $eds& $122?& Puli! "elations, *(iti!al Deates and *onte)po(a(-
P(a!ti!e, .ahwah, A=, 0awrence #rlbaum
0edingham -./., and *runing, =. A., $1222& Puli! "elations as "elations+ip /ana4e)ent9 ;
"elational ;pp(oa!+ to t+e >tud- and P(a!ti!e of Puli! "elations, .ahwah, A=, 0awrence
#rlbaum
0eitch -., and Aeilson, /., $122:& *ringing Publics into Public 4elations5 Aew theoretical
framewor%s for Practice, in Eeath $ed& $122:& op cit pp :18":9@
.c#lreath, ..P. $:<<8& /ana4in4 >-ste)ati! and 7t+i!al Puli! "elations *a)pai4ns, 1
nd
#dn,
0ondon, *rown and *enchmar%
.cHuire, (.=., $:<@<& Theoretical foundations of campaigns in 4ice, 4.#. and At%in, D.#. $eds&
Public Dommunication Dampaigns $1
nd
ed& Thousand 3a%s, DA, -age
.cIie, /. $122:& Jpdating Public 4elations5 )Aew -cience 4esearch Paradigms and Jneven
/evelopments, in Eeath, 4.0. $ed.& $122:& 5+e 'andoo, of Puli! "elations, *;, >a4e pp 8;"<:
4>
Persuasion Ethics
.aletM%e, H., $:<?9& Psychologie der .assen%ommuni%ation. +Psychology of mass
communication,. Eamburg5 Eans"*redow"Cnstitut.
.artinson, /. $:<<?& )Truthfulness in Dommunication Cs *oth a 4easonable and Achievable
Hoal for Public 4elations Practitioners, Puli! "elations 6ua(te(l- 7:.7, pp 71 ', accessed from
www.questia.com -eptember :7, 122;
.oloney, I $1222& "et+in,in4 puli! (elations, 0ondon, 4outledge
.iller, /. $1227& The Propaganda .achine, in .iller, /. $ed.& 5ell /e Bo =ies, 0ondon, Pluto
Press pp
.iller,H.4. $:<@<& Persuasion and Public 4elations5 1 )Ps in a PodL in *otan, D. E. and
EaMleton, >. $eds& Puli! "elations 5+eo(- , Eillsdale, Aew =ersey, 0awrence #rlbaum
Associates pp 7;"@:
3'Ieefe, /. =. $1221&. Pe(suasion9 5+eo(- and (esea(!+, 1nd #d, Aewbury Par%, DA, -age.
Par%inson, .., $122:& The P4-A Dode of Professional -tandards and .ember Dode of #thics5
(hy they are Aeither Professional nor #thical, Puli! "elations 6ua(te(l-, 7?.9 pp 18" accessed
from www.questia.com, 3ctober :2, 122;
Pearson, 4.$:<@<a& *eyond #thical 4elativism in public relations5 co orientation, rules and the
ideal of communication symmetry, in Hrunig, =.#. G Hrunig, 0.A. $eds& Puli! "elations
(esea(!+ annual, vol : pp?8"@8, Eillsdale, A=, 0awrence #rlbaum cited in Durtin and *oynton
$122:& op cit
Perloff, 4... $1229& 5+e D-na)i!s of Pe(suasion,1
nd
#d. .ahweh, Aew =ersey 0awrence
#rlbaum Associates
Petty, 4.#. and =.T Dacioppo $:<@?& *o))uni!ation and Pe(suasion9 !ent(al and pe(ip+e(al
(outes to attitude !+an4e. Aew Bor%, -pringer">erlag
PiecM%a, .. $:<<?& Paradigms, -ystems Theory and Public 4elations, in 0#tang, =., and PiecM%a,
.. $:<<?& *(iti!al Pe(spe!ti8es in Puli! "elations, 0ondon, CT*P pp :17 ":;?
PiecM%a, .. and 0#tang, =. $122:& Public 4elations and the Kuestion of Professionalism, in
Eeath, 4.0 $ed&, op !it pp 119 "19;
Prat%anis, A. and Aronson, #. $122:& ;4e of P(opa4anda,, Aew Bor%5 6reeman!3wl *oo%s
4aven, *.E. $:<@9& Cnterpersonal influence and social power, in 4aven, *.E. and Nubin, =.N
>o!ial Ps-!+olo4-, Aew Bor%, =ohn (iley G -ons
-chic%, T, )Truth, Accuracy $And (ithholding Cnformation& Puli! "elations 6ua(te(l-, 9<
$(inter :<<7!;& cited in .artinson $:<<?&
-eib, P. and 6itMpatric%, I. $:<<;& Puli! "elations 7t+i!s, 6ort (orth, Earcourt *race
-eitel, 6.P. $:<<1& 5+e P(a!ti!e of Puli! "elations, ;
th
#d, Aew Bor%, .acmillan
'0
Persuasion Ethics
-iebert, 6.-., Peterson, T G -chramm, (. $:<;?& 6our theories of the Press, Jrbana, JAiveristy
of Cllinois Press, cited in Durtin G *oynton $122:&
-imons, E.(. $122:& Pe(suasion in >o!iet-, Thousand 3a%s, DA, -age
-tauber, =. and 4ampton, -. $1227& 5o0i! >lud4e is 3ood Co( Dou, 0ondon, 4obinson
Taylor, P..., $1229& /unitions of t+e /ind @ ; +isto(- of p(opa4anda f(o) t+e an!ient wo(ld to
t+e p(esent da-, .anchester, .anchester Jniversity Press
Taylor, P... $122:& (hat is PropagandaL Available online at http5!!ics.leeds.ac.u%!pmt"
terrorism!what"propaganda.pdf, accessed =anuary :; 122;
Toth, #. 0., and Eeath, 4. 0. $eds& $:<<1& "+eto(i!al and *(iti!al ;pp(oa!+es to Puli!
"elations , Eillsdale, Aew =ersey, 0awrence #rlbaum Associates
(eaver, D.I., .otion, = and 4eaper =. $122?& 6rom Propaganda to /iscourse $and *ac%
Again&5Truth, power, the public interest and public relations, in 0#tang and PiecM%a $eds& $122?&
op cit.
(hite, = and /oMier, /., $:<<1& Public 4elations and .anagement /ecision .a%ing, in Hrunig
$ed& op cit
(ilcox, /.0., Dameron, H.T., Ault, P.E, and Agee, (.I. $1229& Puli! "elations, >t(ate4ies and
5a!ti!s, 8th #d, *oston, .A, Allyn and *acon
(ebsites
http5!!www.prwatch.org!spin $Dentre for Media Demo/ra/!)
http5!!www.spinwatch.org.u%
http5!!www.propagandacritic.com

'1
Persuasion Ethics



Fi# 4 0he *thi/s of /ommuni/ation6 adapted from Malet2ke (1>&')
Media power
----------- Po3er !ynamics--------------
$ommuni/atorMs
personal ethi/s
O
;e/eierMs personal ethi/s
Pressure or /onstraint from the
-ne!iurr 456
0eamMs ethi/s
:r#anisationMs
ethi/s
;e/eierMs #roup ethi/s
%o/iall! a//epted ethi/s
Professional ethi/s
Media ethi/s
---------------*thical !ynamics--------------------
'4